Naval Surface Forces Readiness: Are Navy Reforms Adequate?

i [H.A.S.C. No. 116–5] NAVAL SURFACE FORCES READINESS: ARE NAVY REFORMS ADEQUATE? JOINT HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON READINESS MEETING JOINTLY WITH SUBCOMMITTEE ON SEAPOWER AND PROJECTION FORCES OF THE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION HEARING HELD FEBRUARY 26, 2019 U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 35–338 WASHINGTON : 2019 SUBCOMMITTEE ON READINESS JOHN GARAMENDI, California, Chairman TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado ANDY KIM, New Jersey, Vice Chair AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia KENDRA S. HORN, Oklahoma JOE WILSON, South Carolina CHRISSY HOULAHAN, Pennsylvania ROB BISHOP, Utah JASON CROW, Colorado MIKE ROGERS, Alabama XOCHITL TORRES SMALL, New Mexico MO BROOKS, Alabama ELISSA SLOTKIN, Michigan ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas JACK BERGMAN, Michigan DEBRA A. HAALAND, New Mexico MELANIE HARRIS, Professional Staff Member TOM HAWLEY, Professional Staff Member MEGAN HANDAL, Clerk SUBCOMMITTEE ON SEAPOWER AND PROJECTION FORCES JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut, Chairman JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island ROBERT J. WITTMAN, Virginia JIM COOPER, Tennessee K. MICHAEL CONAWAY, Texas DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey MIKE GALLAGHER, Wisconsin SETH MOULTON, Massachusetts JACK BERGMAN, Michigan FILEMON VELA, Texas MICHAEL WALTZ, Florida GILBERT RAY CISNEROS, Jr., California VICKY HARTZLER, Missouri MIKIE SHERRILL, New Jersey PAUL COOK, California KATIE HILL, California BRADLEY BYRNE, Alabama JARED F. GOLDEN, Maine TRENT KELLY, Mississippi ELAINE G. LURIA, Virginia, Vice Chair PHIL MACNAUGHTON, Professional Staff Member DAVE SIENICKI, Professional Staff Member MEGAN HANDAL, Clerk (II) C O N T E N T S Page STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS Courtney, Hon. Joe, a Representative from Connecticut, Chairman, Subcom- mittee on Seapower and Projection Forces ........................................................ 3 Garamendi, Hon. John, a Representative from California, Chairman, Sub- committee on Readiness ...................................................................................... 1 Lamborn, Hon. Doug, a Representative from Colorado, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Readiness ................................................................................ 2 Wittman, Hon. Robert J., a Representative from Virginia, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces ........................................... 5 WITNESSES Aquilino, ADM John C., USN, Commander, U.S. Pacific Fleet, Department of the Navy ........................................................................................................... 7 Grady, ADM Christopher W., USN, Commander, U.S. Fleet Forces Command, Commander, U.S. Naval Forces Northern Command, Department of the Navy ...................................................................................................................... 6 APPENDIX PREPARED STATEMENTS: Courtney, Hon. Joe ........................................................................................... 39 Garamendi, Hon. John ..................................................................................... 37 Grady, ADM Christopher W., joint with ADM John C. Aquilino ................. 43 Lamborn, Hon. Doug ........................................................................................ 38 Wittman, Hon. Robert J. .................................................................................. 41 DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD: [There were no Documents submitted.] WITNESS RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS ASKED DURING THE HEARING: [There were no Questions submitted during the hearing.] QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING: Mrs. Luria ......................................................................................................... 55 Mr. Wittman ..................................................................................................... 55 (III) NAVAL SURFACE FORCES READINESS: ARE NAVY REFORMS ADEQUATE? HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON READINESS, MEETING JOINTLY WITH THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON SEAPOWER AND PROJECTION FORCES, Washington, DC, Tuesday, Feb- ruary 26, 2019. The subcommittees met, pursuant to call, at 10:00 a.m., in room 2118, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. John Garamendi (chairman of the Subcommittee on Readiness) presiding. OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN GARAMENDI, A REPRE- SENTATIVE FROM CALIFORNIA, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON READINESS Mr. GARAMENDI. Good morning. We are prepared to start here. So welcome to all of you. I saw you down there, and I knew we could start. Very good. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. I call to order this hearing, joint hearing of the Readiness and Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittees of the House Armed Services Committee. I would like to state at the outset that we continue to honor and remember the 17 sailors who died in the tragic surface ship collisions of 2017. None of us on this committee, and I am sure within the Navy itself, will forget. And we will continue to mourn those losses that were unfortunately avoidable. Our thoughts remain with their loved ones, with their family and their friends. Over the last 18 months, this committee has held numerous hearings and meetings with Navy leadership in an attempt to un- derstand the causes of those devastating incidents. I appreciate the Navy’s attention to this issue and continued willingness to engage with the committee. I also recognize that implementing significant reforms takes time. Often too much time. However, I am concerned that the Navy has not sufficiently addressed several of the problems responsible for the deadliest naval disasters in four decades. I worry that the Navy leadership remains overly focused on shipbuilding and is not adequately prioritizing the manning and maintenance of its current fleet. I am troubled by reports that the Navy’s investigations were not fully transparent about the extent to which a brutal operational tempo, low morale, and preventable technological challenges con- tributed to these disasters. I wonder if the Navy could do more to constrain the demand for use of the surface force. Moreover, I worry that Navy is not think- (1) 2 ing deeply enough about how to change its culture to empower offi- cers to voice concerns and install an ethic of rigor and excellence. I look forward to hearing the updates from our witnesses on cor- rective actions the Navy has taken in the past year, particularly those related to the numerous surface ship provisions included in the fiscal 2019 NDAA [National Defense Authorization Act]. I en- courage our witnesses to candidly discuss their efforts and any challenges they face as they work to improve the Navy’s surface readiness. I am also eager to learn more about the degree to which the ongoing and planned reforms will be permanently enshrined in naval policy and doctrine. As the memory of those tragic incidents grows more distant, it is our shared responsibility to ensure that crews and ships will continue to be adequately manned, trained, and maintained. This committee stands ready to assist. With that, I would like to turn to our ranking member, Congress- man Doug Lamborn of Colorado, for any remarks that he may want to make. [The prepared statement of Mr. Garamendi can be found in the Appendix on page 37.] STATEMENT OF HON. DOUG LAMBORN, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM COLORADO, RANKING MEMBER, SUBCOMMITTEE ON READINESS Mr. LAMBORN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And it is great to be with the members of the Seapower Subcommittee as well. This combined joint hearing is really important, so I am glad that we are having it. And it really is based ultimately on readiness. So thank you for having this important hearing. I would also like to recognize the spouses of our witnesses: Chris- tine Grady and Laura Aquilino. We on this subcommittee know the vitally important role our precious military families play in the readiness and resilience of our troops. And we appreciate your presence and support here today. Welcome to this hearing. We all recognized too late that Naval Surface Forces, especially forward-deployed ships, were being run too hard. Ship’s maintenance suffered, as did crew training and proficiency. Tragically, it took the deaths of 17 sailors to bring the problem to light and force all of us, the Navy and Congress alike, to pay attention. True to form, the Navy and the Congress took decisive action, in- cluding, particularly in this subcommittee, in last year’s National Defense Authorization Act. Now, nearly 2 years since the fatal collisions and over a year since our last public hearing on this topic, it is time to review the state of Naval Surface Forces. I am concerned with three things: Have the corrections employed made a difference? What further actions are needed? And do any of the changes implemented need to be reversed? I note that our witnesses today are responsible for both the operational control and readiness of the Atlantic and Pacific Fleets. Vesting a single official with the pressures of both responsibilities was part of the problem in 2017, although such vesting was at a lower level of command. 3 I am interested in understanding how these commanders weigh these disparate responsibilities and whether institutional protec- tions are in place to prevent overuse of the fleet in the future. While I am confident in the abilities of our witnesses, I want to ensure that their successors are equally equipped to withstand the imperatives of operational pressures when they are unsure

Load more